Using a sulfur-bearing silane to improve rubber formulations for potential use in industrial rubber articles

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology on 13/08/2012, available online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01694243.The availability of the coupling agent bis (3-triethoxysilylpropyl)-tetrasulfide (TESPT) has provided an opportunity for enhancing the reinforcing capabilities of precipitated amorphous white silica in rubber. Styrene-butadiene rubber, synthetic polyisoprene rubber (IR), acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber, and natural rubber (NR) containing the same loading of a precipitated silica filler were prepared. The silica surface was pretreated with TESPT, which is a sulfur-bearing bifunctional organosilane to chemically bond silica to the rubber. The rubber compounds were subsequently cured by reacting the tetrasulfane groups of TESPT with double bonds in the rubber chains and the cure was optimized by adding sulfenamide accelerator and zinc oxide. The IR and NR needed more accelerators for curing. Surprisingly, there was no obvious correlation between the internal double bond content and the accelerator requirement for the optimum cure of the rubbers. Using the TESPT pretreated silanized silica was a very efficient method for cross-linking and reinforcing the rubbers. It reduced the use of the chemical curatives significantly while maintaining excellent mechanical properties of the cured rubbers. Moreover, it improved health and safety at work-place, reduced cost, and minimized damage to the environment because less chemical curatives were used. Therefore, TESPT was classified as "green silane" for use in rubber formulations

Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard